[David Mosberger <davidm@hpl.hp.com>] problem with unwind info for .init/.fini sections

[Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>]

Another mail from David.  He'll eventually manage to get the mailing
list handler to accept his machine.

--- Begin Message ---

• From: David Mosberger <davidm at hpl dot hp dot com>
• To: <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
• Cc: "David Mosberger" <davidm at hpl dot hp dot com>, Cary Coutant <cary at cup dot hp dot com>, <linux-ia64 at linuxia64 dot org>, libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com
• Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 13:33:39 -0800
• Subject: Re: [Linux-ia64] problem with unwind info for .init/.fini sections
• References: <200202271920.LAA10765@adlmail.cup.hp.com>
• Reply-to: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com

>>>>> On Wed, 27 Feb 2002 11:19:30 -0800, Cary Coutant <cary@cup.hp.com> said:

  >> I can think of two approaches:
  >> ...
  >> Anybody else have a better idea or other comments?

  Cary> (3) Use the .init_array and .fini_array sections instead.

This would be by far the cleanest solution.

How well is this supported in binutils at the moment?  I see some
references to it, but am not sure whether there are any holes in its
support.

Are there any reasons *not* to switch to .init_array/.fini_array as
the primary init/fini mechanism?  Besides fixing the unwind problem,
it seems to me it's generally just a much cleaner solution and should
allow us to get rid of some rather ugly hacks in glibc.

	--david

--- End Message ---